Clubs, especially QMA clubs, you NEED to review your bylaws. Clubs need to remove in their bylaws any wording linking them to ANY sanctioning body!! Any wording as such doesn't and shouldn't belong in your bylaws and is not needed! QMA has already forced a few clubs to conform to this, giving QMA national way more power in your club. IT'S YOUR CLUB NOT QMA'S!! A club is a seperate corporation from the sanctioning body. Your documents and property are as private as you would like them to be and does not need to be distributed, shared or APPROVED by any other corporation. QMA has in their bylaws that the clubs bylaws must be approved, is this legal? Do other corporations share their private documents? I dont think so. Also be aware who and when the bylaws can be opened. Dont be afraid to ask questions. If any answers are denied or are questionable, find out why, you could completly lose your club if you dont. I'm not picking on QMA with this thread but QMA requires this and by their recent actions will require more. USAC requires none of this, your club is your club.

He is 100% right. QMA has a plan to take control of each club by using the by-laws. They started this several years ago and it sounds like they are going to step it up even more. Members and clubs are the losers if they get there way.

I was surprised to hear and see the engine builder and VP Tom "Ziggy" was behind this trick. I sure hope the word gets out the the clubs board of directors before it is too late.

Here is the thing. QMA, as well as USAC own NO tracks. As a matter of fact most tracks are not even owned by the clubs that use them. QMA may take control of a club but that does not mean they will be able to use the track. Just sayin'.

So if I get this right, and existing track(club) which leases or rents from an owner. Does not own the property. If a group approaced the owner and asked to lease the facility for racing. They could potentially have 2 clubs using the same track on seperate dates under different sanctioning bodies? Just as long as the lease or rental agreement does not have an excluvisity clause in it.

Most leases I would think are worded so that there can only be one leasee. Kinda like how my rental property is for that renter. Don't think they'd be very happy if someone else slept in their bed while they were at work.

TQ, FYI your current club has the ability to sub-lease its track. Im sure your clubs main powers dont want you to know this. Which has led to one of the largest anti USAC propaganda campaigns.

This is very true for this could be a chance for the club to make some money....You could rent the track facilities to a group and make money and it all goes directly to the club, and your lease holder would not get any of the monies that would exchange hands...I know that they powers that be would not go for this; however if you get enough club members to go for this; then it might just be doable....

So if a private club, now forced to change it's bylaws to reflect QMA as sanctioning body and now mandates that the bylaws cannot be changed must be implemented and approved by QMA. I just cannont see how "this is for the kids"?

"Tom suggested adding to the by-laws to protect the members and the organization.""Tom suggested we be more protective in the coming years. Tom is going to work with clubs this year to offer help in protecting their clubs.""Tom said by-laws have to be approved by QMA""Tom feels the by-laws need to protect the clubs and members."

If you have had your head in the sand and think QMA is not going to involve themselves in your clubs business, think again. It's appearing the clubs and members need protecting from Tom.

I would like to know how everyone would feel if they went to their next club meeting and before the meeting started, the property owner, who is a NON-CLUB MEMBER, states that your club will now be sanctioned under QMA. And the club meeting is over. Details of the new club will be provided at a later date. If you had more than 50% of the club’s support wouldn’t you accept USAC’s help to remain with USAC?

Brad, good point....BUT. The club asked for QMA to help with the problems that the club was having and they choose to remain silent. Although Rich had some discussions with the track owner QMA had every chance to make it right and choose not to. QMA protects the bad apples and terminates the memberships of the people that are good for the sport of quarter midget racing. We saw the very same thing here in Region 4 a couple of years ago. We know how QMA operates. Then when it all crashed Rich and Ziggy ride into town and tell everyone we are here to help. I would guess that 80% of the clubs members just want to race and dont care what sanctioning body it is. But as a club president (5 years and counting) I can tell you that it is much easier to work with USAC than it ever was with QMA.

Brad - Ask your Regional Director what monies QMA loaned out to what clubs last year. How much was loaned out? How much was paid back? Why is it kept so secret and did the membership approve these loans/donations? Let us know what they tell you and we can compare notes. Also who is paying for the attorney that QMA has hired?